Alstom Class 321 Hydrogen 'Breeze' Updates & Discussion

[Chester1]

Ditton reopening? It's on the Merseytravel wishlist.

I would really like to see that happen but I highly doubt it. It would be a needless complication for an important and complex rolling stock project.

There is quite a catchment area for AC OHLE + hydrogen trains based in Widnes. Apart from the CLC stoppers perhaps some of the Northern DMU services out of Piccadilly and the Halton Curve service. The suggested figure of 15 units would probably solve the rest of Northerns franchise stock needs if the DfT agreed to a variation of the franchise rolling stock obligations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Be an interesting safety case having tanks of highly explosive gas on a passenger train. Offers on names for the first three converted:
Hindenburg
R101
Zeppelin

Hydrogen isn't "highly explosive", it just burns. As long as you store it on the roof (like on the buses which are so fitted) it poses little actual risk.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Hydrogen isn't "highly explosive", it just burns. As long as you store it on the roof (like on the buses which are so fitted) it poses little actual risk.

however is there space with the UK's loading gauge? The pictures Ive seen of the German trial units seem to have extensions on the roof.

 

[Domh245]

however is there space with the UK's loading gauge? The pictures Ive seen of the German trial units seem to have extensions on the roof.

The suggestion from a picture in the article is that the tanks would be installed much like the air con retrofitted to 321s - sections of roof cut out and tanks installed in its place - although I would think it might seriously limit the range

 

[InTheEastMids]

Hydrogen isn't "highly explosive", it just burns. As long as you store it on the roof (like on the buses which are so fitted) it poses little actual risk.

Plus it's so much lighter than air that if it escapes, it disperses very quickly - different to methane, and one reason why it makes sense to put hydrogen tanks on the roof.
However, it does burn with a clear flame which can make a fire more hazardous

Different risk profiles, and different mitigation.

 

[edwin_m]

The roof is structural in a Mk3-based bodyshell so removing sections of it would need some reinforcement. But I guess this would also be needed to support the heavy tanks. The interior might end up a bit claustrophobic and devoid of luggage racks, rather as it is now underneath the pantograph well.

 

[Chester1]

The suggestion from a picture in the article is that the tanks would be installed much like the air con retrofitted to 321s - sections of roof cut out and tanks installed in its place - although I would think it might seriously limit the range

The range is reportedly 600+ miles which combined with overhead electric power should be enough for a full days work. I suspect it will have considerably less power than the German trial units.

 

[Gareth Marston]

The range is reportedly 600+ miles which combined with overhead electric power should be enough for a full days work. I suspect it will have considerably less power than the German trial units.

Well were not the low countries - whether they have enough power to cope with the numerous gradients in the UK is a big doubt. Still we can waste a few more years before the penny drops, seems to be they could be confined to a few "creche areas" few gradients, fairly undemanding (power wise) diagrams lowish speeds not too much hard acceleration between stops etc

 

[Domh245]

Looking at the image from the article again, it actually looks like they will be installed on top of the roof rather than in it, alleviating the potential structural issues that come from cutting it away (although Eversholt have previous with that from the Renatus 321s with their air con modules)

 

[Andy25]

That's certainly not the point that I think Roger Ford was trying to make - Hydrogen no doubt has it's uses, but it shouldn't be used as a get out clause for electrification (although the current cost of electrification works against that somewhat)

Also - for those wondering what the suggested routes are and haven't looked in the article, the 2 suggested routes are Liverpool - Widnes, and Bishop Auckland - Middlesborough. They've also got East West Rail as a 'proposed' line on the map.

Curious why you think it shouldn't be used as an alternative to OHL?

Granted you won't have the same supply power but if what can be provided by other means is sufficient for the type of service and the infrastructure is cheaper than OHL then surely it is better?

 

[Gareth Marston]

Curious why you think it shouldn't be used as an alternative to OHL?

Granted you won't have the same supply power but if what can be provided by other means is sufficient for the type of service and the infrastructure is cheaper than OHL then surely it is better?

The question marks are on -

Power- can it deliver enough hp for working existing diagrams (esp in hilly areas), this in turn is linked to
Speed & Range.

But the big question mark is on operating cost the hydrogen has to be produced and how does this compare with electric (or even diesel)?

If we end up with something that can work a low speed, low acceleration Class 2 diagram in non hilly areas whose long term operating costs are similar to wiring then what is the point of not wiring?

 

[Domh245]

Curious why you think it shouldn't be used as an alternative to OHL?

Granted you won't have the same supply power but if what can be provided by other means is sufficient for the type of service and the infrastructure is cheaper than OHL then surely it is better?

In addition to the points that @Gareth Marston has made, especially with regards to cost over the life cycle, hydrogen is also fairly inefficient when you look at it on a wider scale. There is inefficiency in both production and conversion (admittedly you eliminate the inefficiency in production somewhat if you are using 'waste' hydrogen) compared to providing electricity straight to the train.

That isn't to say that I'd completely outlaw hydrogen trains - it is highly likely that there will never be a 100% electrified railway, there will always be lines for which there will be a need for independently powered trains, and Hydrogen may be of some use there, but it'd be up against Batteries (assuming that Diesel is off the menu) which to my mind offer better performance and are the real focus of development at the moment so are only going to get better.

 

[Gareth Marston]

In addition to the points that @Gareth Marston has made, especially with regards to cost over the life cycle, hydrogen is also fairly inefficient when you look at it on a wider scale. There is inefficiency in both production and conversion (admittedly you eliminate the inefficiency in production somewhat if you are using 'waste' hydrogen) compared to providing electricity straight to the train.

That isn't to say that I'd completely outlaw hydrogen trains - it is highly likely that there will never be a 100% electrified railway, there will always be lines for which there will be a need for independently powered trains, and Hydrogen may be of some use there, but it'd be up against Batteries (assuming that Diesel is off the menu) which to my mind offer better performance and are the real focus of development at the moment so are only going to get better.

No rational examination of the available evidence is going to draw the conclusion that Hydrogen powered trains are going to be the be all and end all of train traction negating electrification. Grayling and the DfT are utterly wrong to try and spin that. I'm also not adverse to a trial to see if there is a opening for their use at a practical level and cost in fleet service however I am worried about long rural lines in hilly areas such as the Cambrian.

If the technology can be made to work at what cost £ does it come and then we open up the subsidy debate again.

 

[driver_m]

I would really like to see that happen but I highly doubt it. It would be a needless complication for an important and complex rolling stock project.

There is quite a catchment area for AC OHLE + hydrogen trains based in Widnes. Apart from the CLC stoppers perhaps some of the Northern DMU services out of Piccadilly and the Halton Curve service. The suggested figure of 15 units would probably solve the rest of Northerns franchise stock needs if the DfT agreed to a variation of the franchise rolling stock obligations.

I can't see it either, but then again everyone was mocking JoJo for this hydrogen claim, so you never know. I'll stick to the Halton Jn tester for now or a times geography typo.

 

[The Ham]

Looking at the image from the article again, it actually looks like they will be installed on top of the roof rather than in it, alleviating the potential structural issues that come from cutting it away (although Eversholt have previous with that from the Renatus 321s with their air con modules)

The image also shows batteries, where excess power is stored. As such chances are the fuel cells are more likely to be there to recharge the batteries between the wires.

 

[Domh245]

The image also shows batteries, where excess power is stored. As such chances are the fuel cells are more likely to be there to recharge the batteries between the wires.

My understanding is that the batteries are mainly for providing extra power on acceleration. The fuel cells essentially run flat out all the time charging the batteries, which only really charge when the train isn't accelerating, to cover for a lack of peak power output from the fuel cells

 

[squizzler]

Looking at the image from the article again, it actually looks like they will be installed on top of the roof rather than in it, alleviating the potential structural issues that come from cutting it away (although Eversholt have previous with that from the Renatus 321s with their air con modules)

I cannot believe that the fuel cells and tank fit into that very slim "saddle" resting on the roof. I imagine that the equipment is roughly semicircular with a flat base, therefore requiring wells to be cut into the roof. Structurally not so different to a pantograph well I expect, but longer and on each car.

 

[The_Engineer]

https://futureoftechnology.co.uk/video/moving-with-the-times-hydrogen-trains/

Interesting Alstom presentation, should answer some of the questions bandied about on this thread.....

 

[The_Engineer]

Hydrogen isn't "highly explosive", it just burns.

I'd be more worried about a tank failure - at 320psi it would go off like a bomb and shred the passenger saloon below.........

 

[squizzler]

I'd be more worried about a tank failure - at 320psi it would go off like a bomb and shred the passenger saloon below.........

Why would it do that? The tanks are probably kevlar or carbon composite, certainly need to be very robust, and would be pressure tested well beyond normal operating range. Any event that ruptures one of these tanks will, by definition, have been catastrophic to the train. I don't think some oik is going to blow up passing trains with their airgun...

 

[WatcherZero]

320 psi is actually a low pressure fuel tank for where space isn't an issue, the ones in cars are 6000-10,000 PSI.

The Alstom guy in the video says they are using 350 Bar which is about 5,000 PSI.

 

[swt_passenger]

My understanding is that the batteries are mainly for providing extra power on acceleration. The fuel cells essentially run flat out all the time charging the batteries, which only really charge when the train isn't accelerating, to cover for a lack of peak power output from the fuel cells

In Roger Ford's recent article, he reckoned that to reduce gas usage the fuel cells would normally operate at about half power, and the batteries would provide peak power.

 

[Mikey C]

Alstom are the firm behind these hydrogen proposals, if they think that hydrogen is a valid option for powering trains then I'm prepared to believe them.

 

[Andy25]

The question marks are on -

Power- can it deliver enough hp for working existing diagrams (esp in hilly areas), this in turn is linked to
Speed & Range.

But the big question mark is on operating cost the hydrogen has to be produced and how does this compare with electric (or even diesel)?

If we end up with something that can work a low speed, low acceleration Class 2 diagram in non hilly areas whose long term operating costs are similar to wiring then what is the point of not wiring?

It will have been checked early on for having sufficient power/range for the diagrams proposed. That's why you wouldn't choose high speed lines etc.

Hydrogen is likely to come from bi-product of local chemical industry which is available in both widnes and the North East so cost is really only transport rather than production.

 

[xotGD]

Hydrogen fuel cells are the future for off-grid rail traction.

Despite all the usual wibble about explosions and airships, it is a safer fuel than liquid hydrocarbons. And zero CO2 emissions from the train (or truck, or bus, or ship).

Better get ready for it, folks.

 

[Domh245]

Hydrogen fuel cells are the future for off-grid rail traction.

Despite all the usual wibble about explosions and airships, it is a safer fuel than liquid hydrocarbons. And zero CO2 emissions from the train (or truck, or bus, or ship).

Better get ready for it, folks.

Batteries? After all, these units and the iLint have proper traction batteries fitted, so why not go the whole hog and go for batteries instead. No need to fill the train up with fuel of any kind, and as I said earlier batteries are the main focus of development at the moment, so it only stands to reason that batteries will improve in energy density for the forseeable future. Hydrogen only really makes sense if you've already got it handy.

 

[Class465fan]

This may sound silly but will this setup be like a bi-mode e.g running on electric mode and hydrogen mode or will it be hydrogen only?

 

[Wivenswold]

This may sound silly but will this setup be like a bi-mode e.g running on electric mode and hydrogen mode or will it be hydrogen only?

Not silly at all, I was wondering exactly the same.

 

[edwin_m]

I think it would be a shame if the 25kV provision was removed on these units. The only visualisation I have seen so far only covers the end coach so it's not clear whether the pantograph is still there.

 

[hwl]

This may sound silly but will this setup be like a bi-mode e.g running on electric mode and hydrogen mode or will it be hydrogen only?

Bi-Mode is the most sensible option as you can then spec smaller batteries and fewer fuel cells if you are happy with lower performance off OHLE... (similar to the 379 battery trial).
I suspect the final solution turns out to be very similar to Porterbrook 769 conversions with the new Renatus 321s being used and pantograph and transformer being retained. The retractioned renatus units would be far easier to connect up fuel cells (or diesel engines too) than the original state ones .